forked from farhoodlabs/paperclip
eb12c42009e55576ca980666f5f8bd1a19c26b9d
2 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
eb12c42009 |
Clarify sandbox provider messaging in company environments (#4902)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Company Environments is the operator-facing seam for choosing where compatible adapters execute work. > - Sandbox provider plugins such as E2B extend that seam, but they are not agent adapters themselves. > - The current Company Environments copy put adapter capability rows and sandbox-provider enablement on the same page without clearly distinguishing the two concepts. > - That made it look like installing the E2B sandbox provider caused a new adapter to appear under adapters. > - This pull request clarifies the UI language so provider plugins are described as backing the Sandbox driver rather than being adapter types. > - The benefit is a more accurate mental model for operators configuring environments and adapters. ## What Changed - Added explicit Company Environments copy stating that installed sandbox providers are not adapter types and instead back the Sandbox driver for compatible adapters. - Renamed the support-matrix column from `Sandbox` to `Sandbox via plugin` to make the provider relationship visible in the table itself. - Extended the existing environments UI test to assert the new clarification text. ## Verification - `pnpm test -- --run ui/src/pages/CompanySettings.test.tsx` Result: could not complete cleanly in this worktree because the checkout is missing its local workspace install links. - Direct Vitest fallback against `ui/src/pages/CompanySettings.test.tsx` Result: failed before test collection on local dependency resolution (`react/jsx-dev-runtime`), so there is no passing automated signal from this checkout. - Manual review Confirm the Company Environments page now says sandbox providers are not adapter types and labels the table column as `Sandbox via plugin`. ## Risks - Low risk. This is a copy-only UI clarification plus a matching test assertion; the main risk is wording drift if the product later decides sandbox providers should be surfaced differently. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex via the local `codex_local` Paperclip adapter. This run used tool-assisted code editing and shell execution. The exact backend model ID and context window are not exposed in the Paperclip run context for this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
|
9b99d30330 |
Add dedicated environment settings page and test-in-environment (#4798)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Agents run inside environments (local, SSH, E2B sandbox) > - Operators need to configure and manage these environments > - But environment settings were buried inside the general company settings page, making them hard to find > - Additionally, when testing an agent from the configuration form, the test always ran locally regardless of which environment was selected > - This PR moves environments into a dedicated top-level company settings section and wires the "Test Environment" button to run inside the selected environment > - The benefit is operators can find and manage environments more easily, and the test button now validates the actual environment the agent will use ## What Changed - Added a dedicated `CompanyEnvironments` settings page with its own route and sidebar entry - Updated `CompanySettingsSidebar` and `CompanySettingsNav` to include the new environments section - Modified the agent test route (`POST /agents/:id/test`) to accept an optional `environmentId` parameter - Updated all adapter `test.ts` handlers to resolve and use the specified execution target environment - Added `resolveTestExecutionTarget` to `execution-target.ts` for remote environment test resolution with cwd fallback - Moved the "Test Environment" button and its feedback display into the `NewAgent` page footer for better UX flow ## Verification - `pnpm test` — all existing and new tests pass - `pnpm typecheck` — clean - Manual: navigate to Company Settings, confirm "Environments" appears as a top-level section - Manual: configure an agent with a non-local environment, click "Test Environment", confirm the test runs inside that environment ## Risks - Low risk. UI-only routing change for the settings page. The test-in-environment change adds an optional parameter with a local fallback, so existing behavior is preserved when no environment is specified. ## Model Used Codex GPT 5.4 high via Paperclip. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |